Overview

Assessment Projects at Cal Poly Pomona

Campus-wide Assessment Policy and Planning

Implementation of the Policy

Recommendations

<top of page

Cal Poly Pomona, like all universities, has a long history of assessing and certifying student work and achievement. Faculty members assess the work of students in all university courses and programs; departments routinely evaluate the achievements of their majors through direct measures of educational "outcomes" and indirect surveys and indicators of student quality and accomplishments. The university regularly examines the competencies of incoming and graduating students in areas such as English and Mathematics. Cal Poly Pomona’s featured educational philosophy of "learning by doing," linking theory to practice and emphasizing demonstration and application of knowledge, places the university in the forefront of the national shift in higher education toward pedagogies promoting active, student-centered learning demonstrated by competencies and learning outcomes.

Cal Poly Pomona has made significant progress in the assessment of student learning outcomes during the last five years. The President’s Assessment Initiative announced in 1995-96 catalyzed institutional efforts to develop and coordinate outcomes-based assessment, reflecting new emphases in accreditation as well as the paradigm shift in higher education toward student-centered learning. Many departments and programs are now planning for or practicing outcomes-based assessment, following pioneers such as the university’s Interdisciplinary General Education Program (IGE) and professional programs in business, engineering, and education subject to credentialing and certification. Special attention has been accorded the subject matter competence of future teachers in credential programs (e.g., CEEMaST math project - Appendix C2, History - Appendix C3).

Six of the university’s eight colleges and schools now have college assessment committees, developing and implementing learning outcomes assessment plans and policies on department and program levels. Eleven departments in three colleges have participated in CSU system-wide conferences on student learning outcomes and assessment in arts and sciences disciplines in the last three years. The College of Business Administration hosts an annual assessment conference for CSU business schools and colleges. In addition, three departments from the College of Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences have hosted assessment conferences on the Cal Poly Pomona campus.

Assessment Projects at Cal Poly Pomona

<top of page

The Faculty Center for Professional Development assumed a leading role in the university’s assessment activities, introducing the Student Outcomes Assessment Projects (SOAP) in 1997, funded by the President’s Assessment Initiative, and sponsoring numerous workshops and activities attended by faculty from colleges and departments across the university (Annex C3). Thirteen SOAP projects involving over sixty faculty from five colleges have focused on core courses and curricula in departments such as biology, chemistry, history, and political science, and programs in business and integrated science general education. A Faculty Associate joined the Faculty Center in January1997 and became coordinator of assessment for the Center and unofficial assessment coordinator and consultant for the university, responding to the interests and needs of faculty, departments, and programs. A listing of all the assessment projects is included in Figure 18. We will now describe a few of these projects in greater detail and the impact they have had on student learning.

College of Business Assessment Project: The purpose of this project was to assess the extent to which students possessed the 10 competencies that were identified as crucial for business students. The project involved conducting focus groups with faculty to define these competencies and then to measure these competencies among the students. A case problem situation was developed and students were asked to analyze the case and identify solutions. The answers students provided were graded by multiple raters, who assessed the extent to which these responses demonstrated the ten competencies. Next the curriculum was reviewed to detect those areas that may be lacking as reflected by the student results. This involved creating curriculum maps to identify where these changes needed to be made. Assignment matrices were created to look at individual courses to consider how they may be enhanced in the skill area that the students lacked. The emphasis was on continuous assessment of student learning and enhancement of the curriculum. Details of this project are included in the report found in Annex C5.

Chemistry Department Assessment Project: This project focused on program assessment, which resulted in curricular redesign to reflect a more student-centered approach. Data on students’ entry-level math ability and their performance in the introductory chemistry course was obtained to determine the relationship between these scores. In addition, students were given the Group Assessment Logical Thinking test to determine their reasoning style. Based on the results of this project, it was clear that there was a strong diversity of learning styles among the students. Based on these findings the general chemistry curriculum has been redesigned to reflect the multiple learning styles as well as to focus on students’ problem solving skills rather than simply on chemistry content. For more information, please refer to the published article in Annex C4.

History Department Assessment Project: This project involved several facets to assess curriculum effectiveness and student learning. Curriculum maps were created to identify the connection between curriculum structure and course offerings. This resulted in the identification of gaps in the curriculum that could be addressed in the future. Another aspect of this project was creating a model course outline for the survey courses in World History so that there is some level of consistency in course material coverage across instructors. In addition, the project also included creating a procedure for collecting student portfolios for faculty committees to review before students graduate. Finally, a student self-assessment procedure was put in place for students to review how well the program met their academic goals. For more details on this project, please refer to Appendix C3.

Kinesiology and Health Promotion (KHP): KHP was one of three departments who helped organize a system-wide assessment conference for its disciplines, held at Cal Poly Pomona. The departmental assessment plan includes exit standards, student portfolio guidelines, and a student self-evaluation rubric. The department has been of great assistance to its sister department at IPoly High School in establishing its own assessment protocols. (For more information, see Annex C4 and a power-point presentation in the Team Room.)

Integrated Science General Education Program (ISGE) Assessment: The ISGE Program curriculum presents a synthesis of topical material in the science GE courses to help students achieve a deep understanding of the key theories in the seven science disciplines of Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Geology, Biology, Computer Science and Mathematics. It presents students with a highly integrated experience through the use of computerized multimedia lessons that focus on 15 systems-level integrative themes. For the assessment project, students in four sections of the ISGE prototype evaluated the effectiveness of this program. The findings from this study suggested that students learned more and at a faster pace than through traditional science courses. The findings also resulted in significant redesign of the computer programs used in the courseware for ISGE. A report is available in the Team Room.

The development of campus-wide learning outcomes assessment policies and plans was advanced by university participation in the Wharton Executive Education Program in April 1998. A five-member team from Cal Poly Pomona, including the then-Vice President for Academic Affairs, worked with teams from nine other CSU campuses on strategies for developing and implementing learning outcomes assessment at their institutions. The team formulated nine action steps to present to President Suzuki and the campus community, promoting the uses of outcomes assessment to improve educational programs and student learning, proving educational effectiveness and demonstrating accountability to our students and the public. The Wharton Action Steps included:

• Enlisting the support of the President and Deans in learning outcomes assessment efforts;
• Designing the successful campus visits of assessment consultant, Dr. Mary Senter of Central Michigan University, in May and August 1998 to present workshops and colloquia advancing learning outcomes assessment methods and plans;
• Enhancing and expanding the faculty-based Student Outcomes Assessment Projects and supporting intensive four-day summer workshops conducted by the Faculty Center for Professional Development for faculty and teams in course and classroom teaching and learning and department and program assessment, enrolling over 65 faculty members from 30 departments in 1998-99;
• Promoting coordination of learning outcomes assessment and institutional assessment efforts through an Assessment Planning Group (APG) that became part of the university’s WASC Steering Committee to help guide the campus’s comprehensive accreditation self-study process and report;
• Forming a broadly based representative university learning outcomes assessment committee through the Academic Senate charged with the formulation and implementation of a campus-wide learning outcomes assessment policy and plan;
• Supporting revision of the university’s general education program through clearer articulation and assessment of program and area goals and student learning outcomes;
• Establishing an office and position of university learning outcomes assessment coordinator to help coordinate and support university assessment plans and the efforts of faculty, departments, and colleges.

As we have seen, the results of the SOAP projects and the progress toward student learning outcomes assessment were impressive at the department and college levels. However, the implementation of structural changes as well as the presence of coordination mechanisms for assessment met with some challenges. A referral proposing the formation of a university committee to develop and implement learning outcomes assessment policy and plans was tabled by the Academic Senate in Spring 1999, during a time of crisis in the CSU over the imposition of the collective bargaining contract by the Chancellor and subsequent declaration by the faculty union of a state of strike. Plans to establish a university learning outcomes assessment office and coordinator have not been privileged above other models of handling assessment by the Academic Senate or the Division of Academic Affairs.

Efforts to promote assessment over the last few years were not in vain, however. A subsequent referral on "Assessment in Lieu of One Cycle of Program Review" handled by the Academic Senate Program Committee has been successful and was approved in July 2000 by President Suzuki. This proposal took into consideration that programs undergoing a program review and at the same time initiating the development of required assessment tools and surveys will be strained by the task at hand and by various time constraints. Programs are allowed a one-time option of substituting a program assessment study for one cycle of program review, provided the program assessment is kept going, in order for its results to be included in all following program reviews.

Given the response of various departments and colleges to this initiative, Cal Poly Pomona should be able to accomplish a significant progress during the next two academic years in the area of assessment of learning outcomes, based on the Basic Elements, Principles, and Procedures for 5-Year Assessment Plans (see Appendix C4). These guidelines have been benchmarked after similar policies were tested at several other universities.

Contexts for Assessment

The progress that Cal Poly Pomona has made in the assessment of student learning outcomes must be placed within the context of the transformation of higher education and the university student population over the past decade, bringing new challenges and opportunities, and forging a new compact of educational accountability and demonstrated effectiveness between schools and the public, based on an emerging vision of active learning-centered education responsive to students and stakeholders.

Faculty development efforts such as the SOAP projects and summer assessment workshops of the Faculty Center have proved particularly effective in enlisting the participation of faculty, redefining core courses and pedagogy in five different colleges, using assessment as a "lever" in the transformation of departments and programs to "learning communities" (Angelo 1997). These efforts featured the following principles of good practice and appeals to faculty:

• Focus on assessment to improve teaching and learning;
• Connection of assessment to real questions and problems;
• Active involvement of teachers and students in core courses and programs;
• Promotion of sharing and collaboration;
• Provision of resources, recognition, and support;
• Clear communication of ideas and information;
• Use of assessment results to make changes in courses and programs.

• Cal Poly Pomona has made substantial progress in the implementation of learning outcomes assessment, despite the obstacles and setbacks noted above. The progress the university has made, and numerous pressures now impinging upon it, establish a context and demonstrate the need to continue efforts to institutionalize assessment and transform the culture of the university through the following strategic actions:
• Supporting revision of the university’s general education program by the General Education Committee of the Academic Senate through clearer articulation and assessment of program and area goals and student learning outcomes.
• Carefully examining the advantages and disadvantages of a centralized approach to assessment versus emphasizing coordination at the College level. Perhaps a combination of both could prove to be the best suited for Cal Poly Pomona.
• Encouraging colleges and departments to use the assessment of programs approach in lieu of program review for one cycle (now approved by the Senate and the President).
• Supporting the continued transformation of the institutional culture of the university and redefinition of faculty responsibilities and roles through faculty development and support for learning-centered assessment in departments and programs, with possible corollary revision of hiring and promotion criteria and rewards to promote a scholarship of teaching and a culture of learning and continuous, consequential assessment.
• Organizing and coordinating of learning outcomes and institutional effectiveness assessment through the action steps above and through the proposed redefinition of the WASC accreditation self-study process in relation to strategic planning, new CSU-mandated accountability processes, and revised academic program review (see Themes 3 and 4).